Presently, fluid substances or medicaments are administered to the ear using a standard fluid "dropper" device. Although the dropper has become widely accepted as a satisfactory means for administering medicaments to the external canal or meatus, use of the dropper for this procedure is often difficult and dangerous. It is especially difficult to administer ear medicine to children via the dropper device unless they are able-to maintain their head in a relatively still position.
If during the administration of medicine to the ear the tip of the dropper device is inserted into the ear canal too deeply, the tip may pierce the tympanic membrane or abrade the inner wall of the ear canal. Thus, with regard to children, it is critical that their head remain completely still while the dropper is proximate the ear, since any movement may force the dropper into damaging contact with even the inner ear. Furthermore, due to the length of the typical conduit, the dropper does not allow the hand of the user to rest against the patient's head for support. Therefore, when administering ear medicine to children, because the user cannot safely rely on the child's ability to remain still, the child must be horizontally positioned or the user must enlist the assistance of another individual to maintain the position of the child.
Moreover, the dropper device dispenses medicine in droplet form which flows into the ear canal along the lower wall only. Thus, the upper and side walls or surfaces of the ear canal are not exposed to the medicament and the treatment may be incomplete. In addition, the dispensing of medicament in droplet form does not assure the administration of a complete and accurate dosage of ear medicament. If the correct dosage of ear medicament is not achieved initially, the user must administer additional doses, frequently wasting a substantial amount of medicament.
Furthermore, utilization of the dropper device involves possible contamination risks. If the dropper tip comes into direct contact with the ear infection, the dropper becomes contaminated and, unless disposed of, further contaminates the fluid medicament when returned to the fluid receptacle.
One example of a standard ear medicine dropper is the Murine Ear Wax Removal System/Murine Ear Drops described in the 1984 edition of Physician's Desk Reference. Although the description recommends that the tip of the dropper not enter the ear canal, the degree of tip penetration is ultimately controlled by the user. Therefore, even the slightest, unexpected head movement could force the dropper tip into damaging contact with the tympanic membrane. Furthermore, the Murine device requires that the head of the patient be tilted sideways for effective administration of medicine.
Other devices which attempt to overcome the disadvantages of Murine-type droppers are well known in the art. One example of such a device is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 1,354,641 to Zietlow. The Zietlow patent offers a solution to the dispensing of medicaments in droplet form by utilizing a combined atomizer and vaporizer to disperse medicine to the entire interior surface of a body cavity. The Zietlow patent discloses a combined atomizer and vaporizer which includes a receptacle and a horizontally positioned atomizing tube. A second tube, which telescopically fits over the atomizing tube, is provided with a nasal engaging nozzle to direct liquid or vapor into the nasal passages. However, the Zietlow device requires the use of both hands, leaving no hand free to steady the head of the user. Also, the length of the vaporizing tube places the apparatus at a distance from the user's head which does not allow support from the hands to prevent head movement. Moreover, the nozzle of the Zietlow device is constructed particularly for use with the nose and therefore is not configured to prevent damage to the exterior ear organs.
Another example of a device structured to overcome the disadvantages of a dropper is disclosed in the Brown patent, U.S. Pat. No. 3,625,213. The Brown patent discloses a device for dispensing medicaments into body cavities such as the ear or nose which includes a flexible capsule, a support member and a conduit which is reduced in diameter to readily project into a body cavity for fluid application. While the Brown conduit readily projects into the body cavity, it is not structured to prevent excessive penetration which may damage the external organs of the ear canal. Furthermore, for use with the ear, the Brown device must be inverted or the user's head must be tilted.
Still another device which seeks to improve upon the fluid dropper is disclosed in, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,666,182 to Cureton. The Cureton patent discloses a squeeze bottle for emitting a horizontal spray comprised of nozzle. The neck portion is positioned so that the user need not invert the bottle or tilt his head. However, the Cureton device must be turned to an angle of 90.degree. to achieve emittance of a horizontal spray. Furthermore, the nozzle portion of the Cureton device is not dimensioned to prevent deep penetration into the ear canal which may damage the external ear organs.
Moreover, none of the above-described devices reliably delivers an accurate and complete dosage of ear medicament to the ear of the user.
Thus, the need exists for an ear spray apparatus which reliably administers an accurate dosage of medicament to the ear canal while minimizing the possibility of injury to the external ear organs. The need also exists for an ear spray device which leaves one of the user's hands free to steady the head or to prevent head movement which could cause injury to the ear.